Plumbing the depths

Wherein Simon reveals certain things about strippers, Star Wars, Stephen Donaldson and a strange ambivalence about Manitoba.

Last week, Paul asked me five questions and I said that I'd get around to answering them sometime after the weekend.  I ripped off the concealing shroud behind which my more visceral self pulses and exposed it to the air.  Turns out that I can get a little verbose when I do that.

Which young and foolish activity do you look back upon with embarrassment and chagrin? Full details please.

This one time, at band camp… (no, that won’t work.)

There was the time my mom found… (no, we won’t go there…)

Well, unfortunately, this one is very easy.  Upon reading the question, the answer came to me like manna from heaven.  Or a swift punch to the gut.  So here goes.

I’m going back over a decade here, to my second year of university.  It was April and I was approaching crunch time for final exams.  Everybody was.  I’d gotten through the first year of engineering and was now in my first year of specialisation in the chemical discipline (ChE).  In one of our first-year courses, the prof told us to look to our right and to our left: neither of those two individuals will be with you four years from now.  How very true that was.  First year weeds a lot of people out [up to 25%] and very few students who continue cruise through their tenure with anything resembling a regular set of classmates.  Of my close circle of friends that started in that first year, not much more than 50% graduated from engineering; the others changed disciplines or faculties or schools or… does it sound like I’m stalling?  I’m not.  Really.

Finals can be a very stressful time.  All the course work performed over the semester boils down to these single two- or three-hour exams accounting for 50%, or sometimes up to 75%, of the entire grade.  December and April are bad times around the university.  The most common means of relieving the stress that accumulates at this time is to head to the bar and enjoy some libations with a few close friends in shared misery and commiseration.  Now engineers are purported, or so the stereotype goes, to engage in this sort of behaviour on a fairly regular basis to begin with.  (Brief aside: some of the  best studying I ever did was during a three to four hour stretch with my buddy in a bar over two pitchers of beer just before one particular final exam.  I had received 17% on the midterm and ended up with a 6/9 in the course.  Score!)  So, given that ‘geers enjoy BEvERages more regularly than most other students, to what next level must we then repair in order to relieve the added stress of final exams?

We take a trip to the peelers.  The more sordid details of which will, of course, be left to the imagination, and really have nothing at all to do with the embarrassment and chagrin that are being sought in this question, other than the simple fact that I was AT the peelers.  Though I have to say that there was a particular woman on stage that performed an absolutely hilarious routine with a couple of those fuzzy-haired troll dolls that had all of us in stitches.  It was rare to see someone so self-effacing under the glare of the spotlight in a den of iniquity and masculine squalor.  The greater part of the reason that routine was so memorable was, of course, that it took place just before the scene that was the cause of my embarrassment and put the ‘cha’ in my grin.  Which I’m getting to in a roundabout sort of way.

There was a small group of about five of us ensconced around a couple of tables kitty-corner to the stage.  We were enjoying a few pitchers of beer and I think they were serving up free chili-cheese-dogs that night.  You know, to attract the proper calibre of clientele.  (Does it matter?  No, but if I’m going to embarrass myself, I’d rather take a flaming leap of death off the seventh circle of Minas Tirith than quietly hang myself in seclusion.  I’m like that.)  So the scene was set.  A small group of stressed-out friends and classmates getting drunk and eating chili dogs in a stripper bar while a naked woman comported herself on stage in such a fashion as to have the lot of us red-faced with laughter.  What then could possibly occur that would alter my heightened state of jocularity to one of mortification?  From behind, the hand of God descended firmly down upon my left shoulder.

“So, how’s the studying going, Son?”

It was my father.  My red face of hilarity changed rapidly to a red face of humiliation and then even more quickly drained of all colour completely.  This was not due exclusively to the fact that my father had just caught me at a strip club.  (I mean, he was there too, right?)  The second thought that entered my head, after my white-faced fear abated slightly, was that a few days prior, my dad and stepmum had invited me over for supper on the weekend.  I had begged off the invitation, pleading the need to study for final exams.  And now here it was, Saturday evening, and I was definitely NOT studying.  Anatomy, maybe.  The situation was further exacerbated by the fact that, after overcoming their own initial shock, the rest of my friends found a new source of hilarity and made no efforts to conceal it.

So I was abandoned to stutter incoherently at my father, who was there with a very drunk co-worker, celebrating his stag party.  Tension eased after my own initial shock started to wear off and I was left feeling simply discomfited.  My small group left the establishment after a short while, fleeing elsewhere, and the whole fiasco is now a source of remembered amusement.  More for my father and friends than for me.  And now for all of you as well.  Yippee...

If you were to be tragically taken from your family tomorrow, how would your wife describe you to your son when he is grown up?

I don’t know.  Let’s go ask her.

Now don’t get all huffy.  I did ask her.  But I jotted down my answer first and THEN asked her.  Here’s what we had to say.  In brief.

HE:
I think she would say that he was a good man who made her want to fall in love again at a time when she was afraid to.  And that she helped him overcome a similar inhibition.  That he valued a strong sense of self and wanted to see that incorporated in both his wife and his son.  She would say he was a hard worker who sometimes took his job too seriously, but it was mostly out of concern for being a good family provider.  And that family was the most important element in his life. 

She would say that he had better eyesight than most men, better than 20/20 in both eyes as a matter of fact; which made the incident with the cement truck full of margarita mix all the more tragic…

SHE:
She said that he was kind.  That was the first thing she said.  And that he was kind of geeky.  That was the second thing.  But also handsome.  She said that he treated both his wife and his son with the utmost respect and that he wanted certain expectations to be made very clear.  An education would be of paramount importance, whatever form that may take.  And that it would be very important for his son to grow up with a strong sense of individuality.

She somehow failed to mention his rapacious wit and irresistible animal magnetism.  He thinks that they were next on the list though.

The Lions of Al-Rassan has recently been optioned by a major motion picture studio. What other novel would you most like to see given a movie treatment? What novel that you like should absolutely never be made into a movie, and why?

I would like to see Stephen Donaldson’s GAP series (of 5 books) translated onto the screen.  For a couple reasons.

It’s a damn fine read and, for as little Sci Fi as I’ve read, at least in relation to the amount of Fantasy I can claim to have devoured, it’s completely centred on the human story that forms its core.  A lot of Sci Fi books try to show off their level of technological detail at the expense of what’s really interesting or important.  The futuristic backdrop in GAP is merely the setting in which the story plays out.  It’s got humour, tragedy, heroes, villains, bad guys cum good guys, space ships, lasers and aliens.  It’s got it all. 

Almost more than that though, I’d like to see an honest effort at a science fiction movie that could compete with Star Wars.  This one could; if done right.  The central figure is a despicable anti-hero upon whom you would wish the most tortuous maledictions for the pain and suffering he has caused.  In general, and to one woman in particular.  So in much the same way that the underlying theme of the entire Star Wars saga is the fall and redemption of Darth Vader, so too is this series about that same journey taken by Angus Thermopyle.  (Ther-MOP-ilee)  A difference being that when you meet him, he’s already as bad as he’s gonna get.

(Honourable mention: just off the cuff here, but Neil Gaiman’s American Gods would make a pretty cool flick all by itself.)

And which book should never be made into a movie? 
I’d say Lord of the Rings because it’s impossible to do it justice, but Peter Jackson knocked the crap out of that claim.  So here I’ll have to go with a relatively recent book I’ve read as being impermissible to turn into a movie.  Dorothy Dunnett’s A Game of Kings.

There is only one reason that this should never be attempted: Francis Crawford of Lymond.  Now, this is the first in a series of six books, but it stands alone quite nicely and it is to just this one book that I am referring.  That being said, one would think the effort might then be made.  Nope.  No sir.  Dunnett’s protagonist could not reasonably be portrayed on the screen by any man I have ever seen act.  He is a figment of imagination set against the backdrop of renaissance Europe and is too perfect; and too perfectly flawed.

He absolutely oozes wit, charisma, hubris, intelligence, cruelty, ruthlessness and an astounding physical ability.  Seeing him portrayed in a movie by any man would be but a shadow of the figure that is created in the words that Dunnett used to sculpt him.  Plus he would have to be played by a relatively young actor.  There is simply too much LIFE that would have to come across in that role.  It would be sorely disappointing.

(Again for extra credit: Anything by Terry Goodkind should never be inflicted on anybody in movie format.  Ick.  I should have stopped reading several books ago.)

You have lived in Ontario and Alberta. What is your take on the East/West Canadian political debate?

(Many of the points I offer here are very general and ideological in nature and merit more attention than can be given in what is really a rather whimsical blog posting.  Please keep that in mind.)

Well, see, it all started when Sir John A. MacDonald united this here country of ours with the Canadian Pacific Railroad.  A twin ribbon of steel connecting the nation from West to East.  Though a good move, and a vital one given the geographic expanse that is near second to none in this world, it was largely done under duress.  (It would have been built anyway, perhaps just not quite so soon.)  British Columbia, recognised as an important source of natural resources, and seeing this for itself, refused to join Confederation until promised that this tenuous connection was to be made. 

So that sort of set the tone for East/West relations in the times to come.  The West was seen as a repository of resources that were vital to growth (BC largely for is forestry and fisheries, Alberta for oil and cows [moo!], Saskatchewan as an expansive farming region and Manitoba has, well, a lot of lakes and gets really cold in winter and nobody’s really ever sure if it’s east or west to begin with).  The East was then seen as the seat of political power and industry.

Here, each side needed the other for mutual growth and advantage, knew its own strengths, yet was completely unwilling to relinquish, or distribute, control in a fair manner.  The East would have to pay for whatever it got from the West which would, in return, never receive the sort of political recognition that it held out for, for the exact reasons that it was holding out!  (Now could somebody please tell Alanis Morissette that that is ironic?)

So this sort of thinking has propagated to today.  The same antagonistic bahaviours are realised in provincial transfer payments that are disputed by the haves, even though they can well afford to give to the have-nots.  It is seen in national news broadcasters descrying a political victory with a smirk when the polls have only closed as far west as Thunder Bay.  It seems to have ultimately resulted in a sense of hotly-denied insecurity in the West (we don’t need them no more!), balanced by a mostly-undeserved disdain emanating from the East.  It has not, unfortunately, resulted in the realisation that all that we need is the simple end result that came about from the Last Spike being driven at Craigellachie, British Columbia on November 7th, 1885.  Unity.  (Thank God, Paul, you didn’t ask about Quebec.)

Today, the globe can be circumnavigated in less than 80 hours.  Friendships can be born and fostered across thousands of kilometres and across oceans with nary the twain having met.  Mankind has landed on extra-terrestrial ground and has lobbed technology outside our own solar system with the noble intent of someday fostering friendly relations with beings not of this Earth.  Anyone who thinks that the solution to petty political tension and unease is geographic isolation, be it intentional separation(like some right-wing redneck Albertan wingnuts want) or derived from a blindingly arrogant hauteur (as is stereotyped in Torontonians) that sets one group apart in a manner no physical boundary can, ought to give their head a shake or, better yet, have it smacked against a brick wall several times for them.

What is the better second movie, Wrath of Khan or Empire Strikes Back, and why?

Unleashing with both barrels to finish it off, eh?  Let’s talk first movies, uhh, first.

For anyone who knows me even remotely well, you will know that Star Wars is one of the great passions in my life.  It was the first movie I ever attended, in 1977, and the underlying philosophy behind it has kept me as an ardent fan for nearly three decades.  In 1983, I walked out of the theatre after having just seen Return of the Jedi absolutely needing to BE Luke Skywalker.  Light sabres and all other coolness aside, it is the simplicity of the story of good and evil and redemption that strikes such a chord with me.

Star Trek, on the other hand, especially when Gene Roddenberry steered the show in the same way that Kirk steered his ship, was a vehicle used to point out the vast potential of the human race and cited certain specific examples where that potential was far from being realised.  And also some where the true nobility shone through.  Star Trek: The Motion Picture was a philosophical and overlong summary of this that took place after the series had been cancelled.  The whole V’GER thing was a neat twist though.

It will be very important here to answer the specific question asked.  For the better movie is Empire Strikes Back.  However, the better second movie is Wrath of Khan.  Now I’d best tell you why I think that.

First of all, Star Wars is my favourite film EVER.  Not Empire, not Jedi.  Star Wars.  It encapsulates all I love about the entire series.  Barring the mystery of Vader’s fighter spinning off into space just before the destruction of the Death Star at the end, it is a complete package and is beautiful in taking the full circle of the journey motif, finishing with the hero’s victory.  All else that came after it has been a step beneath that pedestal, in mine eyes.  So really, there is very little chance of anything that came after Star Wars being a better second movie.

Wrath of Khan, on the other hand, was a great step forward in story-telling over the first Star Trek movie.  (Though some say that Jerry Goldsmith’s score of the first film simply cannot be beat.  There is more to a movie, however, than the score.)  Here we had more than a philosophical treatise on the nature of Man.  Or perhaps, a more realistic one.  Here was pitted a man against his nemesis.  Here were revealed the very base emotions of racism, hatred, retribution; counterbalanced with love, earnest striving and incredibly noble self-sacrifice.  (It also wasn’t quite as campy as some of the future Trek movies tended to be.)

It can also be argued that Khan makes a better villain than Vader.  He’s no faceless automaton; he’s a real, living, emoting person who’s been cooped up in banishment for the past 15 years, just itching to sink his claws into the bastard that put him there.  He’s not out to subjugate the galaxy, he just wants simple revenge upon one man.  This is something I think most of us can relate to on a much more personal level than is possible with Vader.

And of course there’s the final climactic battle in the nebula, the outcome of which hinged on the selfless actions of one man.  Well, one person.  I rarely tear up in movies.  And science fiction movies?  Pfffftt.  Star Wars never made me cry.  But I cry at the end of Wrath of Khan every time I watch it.  It’s my Old Yeller.  It’s definitely the better second movie.

---

Now according to the rules of the game, and who am I to shuck the rules (Yay conformity!), I will here offer myself to pose 5 questions to you (assuming you actually read this far down), tailored to reveal your own idiosyncracies.  Just make a comment below or drop me an Email.  You then post the answers to your website for all and sundry to point and laugh.

Comments

[fv]

ok, I'll bite. I didn't sign up for Paul's but my mind is now prepared. Shoot.

[Paul]

Interesting. Where will you post the answers?

[james]

Wrong.

Empire Strikes back is the better second movie clearly. Asking which is the better second movie indicates that there should be a form or a progression to the movies. Star Wars is 1 story set using the perfect timing and placing as a Trilogy. Star wars has the Intro to the Characters and there first triumph, Empire smashes the "new hope" with defeat and Jedi redeems and ties it all together.

Wrath of Khan is the the best of the Star Trek movies to be sure, but instead of being a great Second movie in a series it is only the best version of the same movie filmed 10 different times.

There now you know.

[Simon]

My friend, I must fart in your general direction. Or agree to disagree. I am basing my criteria solely on comparison to the preceding movie in each series. By that means, Khan is CLEARLY the better second flick.

Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time.

[corpsey]

Si, fire me five.

[fv]

I've posted my answers at The Institute, filed under propaganda.

[Tina]

Hey, Simon. was just rereading your answers. Was interesting to see the comment about the East - West debate in Canada. Reminds me of the whole New York - L.A. thing. Crazy, isn't it ? I love it when all the "Hollywood" actors talk about how nothing beats NYC. However, they seem to enjoy spending alot more time on a Hollywood sound stage than a New York city theater stage. MONEY TALKS. Tina

[Linda]

This is kinda weird, I just read the post about E=mc2, commented that I was born on AE's b-day. Then I clicked on this post, ramdomly and it just happened to be my and Albert's birthday.
I know yu don'[t get off on coincidences and stuff, but I do!